Dunkirk

10

mrdr4gonNov 18, 2017

A wonderfully visceral masterpiece of visual storytelling, told with complete, relenting intensity. The sound design work in particular is masterful - it's loud, fear-inducing and probably louder than the battle itself was.

7 of 10 users found this helpful73

All this user's reviews

10

TheSpoiler18Nov 15, 2017

This has to be one of the best war movies that I have ever seen. As a lover of history, this was obviously a must-see. When I finally watched it, I fell in love with the characters. The action was amazing, the visuals beautiful, the storyThis has to be one of the best war movies that I have ever seen. As a lover of history, this was obviously a must-see. When I finally watched it, I fell in love with the characters. The action was amazing, the visuals beautiful, the story complex, and the score completely awe-inspiring. Once again, Christopher Nolan does not disappoint!… Expand

1 of 4 users found this helpful13

All this user's reviews

7

FedorkoNov 13, 2017

Dunkirk's building of tension is skillful, and Nolan's playing of time from 3 different perspectives is clever. Certainly one of the best movies of the summer, but I expected a finale with more gravitas. It was a weak ending that made meDunkirk's building of tension is skillful, and Nolan's playing of time from 3 different perspectives is clever. Certainly one of the best movies of the summer, but I expected a finale with more gravitas. It was a weak ending that made me question what the movie was even about, and made me realize that Nolan has never made a movie without a twist ending. However, I cared about his characters and their plights. A solid film.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

10

FilmJunkie2020Nov 11, 2017

Dunkirk is a film of little dialogue, loud sounds, and extreme emotion. Regardless of what you thought about Christopher Nolan before, with Dunkirk, he has given us a masterclass in storytelling.

1 of 6 users found this helpful15

All this user's reviews

1

andresfperezzOct 31, 2017

I totally hated it, it is disgusting and i think it should cancelled and i hope i never see it again because my eyes would bleed and i could die from a heart attack.

2 of 7 users found this helpful25

All this user's reviews

10

DarkNight_Oct 30, 2017

Very cool movie
He brought together war and drama together and that is not the case in other films
It is also a silent film and a powerful event and gigantic music

4 of 10 users found this helpful46

All this user's reviews

8

ConorMacleodAug 20, 2017

Dunkirk is a great historical reflection of the events during World War II. Supported by the foundations of an intense score, Dunkirk features transparent dramatic performances that accentuate the time period and a simple narrativeDunkirk is a great historical reflection of the events during World War II. Supported by the foundations of an intense score, Dunkirk features transparent dramatic performances that accentuate the time period and a simple narrative intertwined into three different divisions of time; effectively mixing up the way the audience perceives the events of the narrative.

Dunkirk: A- (VG5)… Expand

1 of 5 users found this helpful14

All this user's reviews

9

soydansilvaOct 25, 2017

a chaotic, unforgiving and exciting film. one of the most captivating films you'll see this year. an intense non-linear journey, and a cinematic event that you should not miss.

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

9

spencieOct 23, 2017

Christopher Nolan's most intense movie, Dunkirk is a masterfully directed and edited film. The cinematography is beautiful and the directing is just so perfect. The performances are all great, but the characters have nothing to them. DunkirkChristopher Nolan's most intense movie, Dunkirk is a masterfully directed and edited film. The cinematography is beautiful and the directing is just so perfect. The performances are all great, but the characters have nothing to them. Dunkirk is one of the most unique war films I've ever seen not because of the story, but because of the great, unique editing and perfect directing.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

2

GinevraOct 20, 2017

For the whole movie I felt like I was waiting for something to happen and then the movie ended and I was left with nothing. This movie gave me nothing, it doesn't have a point and it doesn't have a purpose. The only remarkable thing about itFor the whole movie I felt like I was waiting for something to happen and then the movie ended and I was left with nothing. This movie gave me nothing, it doesn't have a point and it doesn't have a purpose. The only remarkable thing about it was tom hardy's performance.… Expand

3 of 8 users found this helpful35

All this user's reviews

10

DatamariOct 17, 2017

My most anticipated movie of the year, and man, it did not disappoint. Dunkirk is Christopher Nolan at his best. This is a bleak, gripping, and exciting war movie that kept me glued to my seat for the entire runtime. Harry Styles,My most anticipated movie of the year, and man, it did not disappoint. Dunkirk is Christopher Nolan at his best. This is a bleak, gripping, and exciting war movie that kept me glued to my seat for the entire runtime. Harry Styles, surprisingly is fantastic in this movie. A lot of people were worried when he was casted into the role, but as the eyes of the audience, he works incredibly well. The rest of the ensemble are great as well; Tom Hardy and Mark Rylance being the two standouts, but nobody lags in this. While Styles is first in the cast listing, there's no main character per se, rather it's about all of the Allied who fought for their lives. There is very little dialogue in this movie; the plot advances by subtle visual and audio cues, the timing of the shots, and the brilliant score done once again by Hans Zimmer. On top of nailing the atmosphere of a barren war zone, Dunkirk's action is on point. It's not as exciting as Saving Private Ryan or Glory, but it still offers the same emotional impact as the two. Your heart will drop when you hear the machine gun of an enemy plane in the distance. My only real issue with this movie is, while the character of the Allied is engaging, and I cared enough about each of them, their characters aren't interesting on their own. All they have is personalities, and that's it; no backstory, no intrigue. But as I said, Dunkirk is about the troops as a group, so I could easily overlook this. Overall, Dunkirk is an exceptional entry in Nolan's filmography. Exciting, engaging, and edge-of-your-seat suspenseful, it's the best war film of the modern era, and one of the best of the year so far.

Dunkirk gets a 10/10… Expand

10 of 13 users found this helpful103

All this user's reviews

10

LeoGalizaOct 13, 2017

The best blockbuster of 2017. Intense, beautiful with a non-cliche storytelling. Amazing sound effects and cinematography. A masterpiece. Chris Nolan in his best form.

1 of 4 users found this helpful13

All this user's reviews

10

tsmothers93Oct 11, 2017

Dunkirk is one the best war films in film history. It does not display overused violence to unnerve an audience, it displays the horrors of war with tone and tension. The technicality of the camerawork shows that Nolan is one of the bestDunkirk is one the best war films in film history. It does not display overused violence to unnerve an audience, it displays the horrors of war with tone and tension. The technicality of the camerawork shows that Nolan is one of the best directors in film history. Every visual and every sound leaves you on the edge of your seat, much like the men on the beach are on constant alert. The lack of dialogue lends itself to the reality of war and the unfamiliarity with the soldiers and the battlefield. The film is one of the best of the year.… Expand

1 of 5 users found this helpful14

All this user's reviews

9

PericowskyOct 1, 2017

Christopher Nolan is a genius, when telling a war story where the war is not important, there is no real protagonist, all cast members are important pieces of this film, coupled with excellent photography, sound effects and special effects doChristopher Nolan is a genius, when telling a war story where the war is not important, there is no real protagonist, all cast members are important pieces of this film, coupled with excellent photography, sound effects and special effects do a masterpiece of 2017.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

0

MovieGuru69Oct 1, 2017

The most over hyped and dumbest movie of the year. If you want to see the same boring story told 3 different ways then this will be the perfect movie for you to see.

5 of 11 users found this helpful56

All this user's reviews

8

poewilsonSep 30, 2017

The P.H. Metric 82/100

Directing: 9/10 The directing takes a hit, not because of Nolan’s efforts, but because of the script supervisor who I place in the directing section. Within the opening bombing of the film, (aside from PG-13ingThe P.H. Metric 82/100

Directing: 9/10

The directing takes a hit, not because of Nolan’s efforts, but because of the script supervisor who I place in the directing section. Within the opening bombing of the film, (aside from PG-13ing something that should have been utterly horrific) the beach that was just blasted with several bombs does not seem to have taken a strike in any form. The men laying on the ground have no blasts sites near them or anything of that nature and this same issue reappears through out the film.

As for Nolan from the moment we hit the beach and you see that shot taken of those two wooden pillars you can feel the influence of silent era films, which gives Dunkirk a completely different delivery to 99% of the other war films out there.

Acting: 6/10

Due to the film be shot in the vein of a silent film the acting did not need to be perfect and the sheer lack of dialogue presented Nolan with the chance to cast near unknowns which added to the depth of the film and the soldiers naivete, however what little acting was on display did not amount to any grand gesture of the art, but instead more akin to Bicycle Thieves.

Cinematography: 9/10

Superb, not Lubezeki great, but excellent none the less (also I should divulge I am a huge Cinematography nerd) I have been a fan of Hoytema’s work since Låt den rätte komma in and he continues to impress with some of his most exquisite work to date.

Editing 9/10

Superb, couple of shots that did not quite gel as well as they should but ultimately the editing is on point and delivers action in just the right manner.

Score: 10/10

Hans Zimmer’s score is pulse pounding and on point in every frame of the film, from start to finish it will leave you a sense dread that the film itself never truly captilaises on, but that is in no way the fault of Zimmer. Nolan’s use of the Shepard tone was brilliant and really gives life to the piece.

Visual Effects: 9/10

Are stunning and capture the world perfectly, but this like many of Nolan’s other films are due to his love of practical effects and I tend to agree if they are done correctly, you get a better quality image that does not age near as horribly.

Writing: 5/10

The film takes a heavy hit in terms of the writing, what with the script running a lean 76 pages. I can appreciate the improvised nature Nolan was trying to create, as war is chaos and there are no heroes spewing golden lines of perfection, however the lines that were on display were unrelentingly movie-esque to the point that the sense of realism that he was trying to portray with the improvisation gets washed away in a sea tropes.

Production Design 8/10

Again only for the pedantic but there are host of anachronisms that plague the film and several shots with buildings that should not be there, that really feel like production design and costume design issues.

Costume Design 8/10

Again only for the pedantic but there are host of anachronisms that plague the film and several shots with buildings that should not be there, that really feel like production design and costume design issues.

Make-up/Hairstyle 9/10

Make-up had an easy run on this film when compared to many modern war films, but for what they did contribute they did a great job. No awards obviously, but they came out and made sure that everything looked decent.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

6

wendyisabigailSep 29, 2017

Toast and jam anybody? All jokes aside, this was an interesting twist on typical war movies. The pacing was frustrating at times, but I guess the intention was to mirror the actuality of hopelessness of wars.

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

8

DirigiblePulpSep 28, 2017

This is a hard movie to love, at least at first. I appreciate what Nolan did with the overlapping storylines and the nonlinear storytelling, revealing time and perspective to be all-together subjective. I'm just not sure it always works fromThis is a hard movie to love, at least at first. I appreciate what Nolan did with the overlapping storylines and the nonlinear storytelling, revealing time and perspective to be all-together subjective. I'm just not sure it always works from a pure storytelling point of view. What is achieved is non-stop intensity, but at the expense of character, story and a bigger picture. The chaos of war has never been clearer but at what cost.

I found myself appreciating the ways in which each storyline overlapped and how that changed the perspective of the whole thing more than I did actually watching the film. Maybe it's something that will be rectified with time and more reflection. And this isn't to say the movie doesn't work, because it does and it never stops compelling and drawing in your interest, your mind, and your emotions.

Not up for debate however is the stunning majesty of this film. 70mm Imax at the Grand Canyon two days in a row and it was a visual feast like I've almost never experience before. The trailers leading up to the film looked good and all but then suddenly it was like someone opened a six story window into another world - it was that clear and that dramatic the increase in quality of the picture. Picture quality isn't supposed to get better when it gets bigger, especially this big, and yet there I was experiencing it. Let's hope we don't ever lose this.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

9

Humble_BragSep 22, 2017

The movie is solely about the event. It's realistic and genuine in its attempt to really capture the horror and desperation the characters go through. This is a war movie, not an explosive extravaganza, so don't expect giant spectacle.

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

8

temptershellSep 17, 2017

Film about war in anti-war climate. Showing the tragedy of the war and all of this conflict of turmoil went out to Nolan excellently only in my case I did not buy it. Practically no soundtrack and tiring, long scenes with panoramas orFilm about war in anti-war climate. Showing the tragedy of the war and all of this conflict of turmoil went out to Nolan excellently only in my case I did not buy it. Practically no soundtrack and tiring, long scenes with panoramas or sequences of military conflict just bore me. The film is worth attention but unfortunately it is not my climate.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

8

duckmasterSep 16, 2017

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This is a decent war movie that has great effects and visuals. It is also unique in how the idea of survival is emphasized throughout the film; specifically, three of four groups of individuals are the focus. However, there is a lack of character development because of this.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

0

LevelheadSep 15, 2017

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I don't know what movie the good reviews saw but it wasn't Dunkirk. The weaving timeline was unnecessary and confusing but the director had to put his stamp on the movie. Very little character development, my wife also said she could not identify with any of the characters. If you like action and no story (which is hard to do with this story) this is right up your alley. Fighter pilot scenes that drag on and on...only one captain's point of view...Really? I found the vision of this movie to be myopic and trite. A great story that was not flushed out, instead special effects and a director more interested in telling the story his way instead of telling a great story. The story needs no great direction just someone capable of telling a great story well.… Expand

5 of 24 users found this helpful519

All this user's reviews

9

PrettyGoodSep 13, 2017

The best movie of the year, so far. A true masterpiece. The cinematography, the sound and the different stories give you a suspenseful and powerful take on WW2. Despite lack of character, the movie is relatable, you feel present, you'reThe best movie of the year, so far. A true masterpiece. The cinematography, the sound and the different stories give you a suspenseful and powerful take on WW2. Despite lack of character, the movie is relatable, you feel present, you're compassionate with the soldiers. Watching it in a movie theater is a unique experience.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

9

evansideasSep 11, 2017

Nolan surprised me with this one, alike in the way with Memento. Timeline plays to his favor, and the story is beautiful. Writing, style, and directing plays to the favor of this film. While the switch between stories may confusing to theNolan surprised me with this one, alike in the way with Memento. Timeline plays to his favor, and the story is beautiful. Writing, style, and directing plays to the favor of this film. While the switch between stories may confusing to the audience, it merits talent in squeezing a long film into a cinema timeframe.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

8

jacoobi456Sep 10, 2017

Dunkirk was a haunting, not Hollywoodized depiction of the battle of Dunkirk, directed by none other than Christopher Nolan. The choice of the lead role was a good one, as he was a relatively unknown actor at the time of his casting, whichDunkirk was a haunting, not Hollywoodized depiction of the battle of Dunkirk, directed by none other than Christopher Nolan. The choice of the lead role was a good one, as he was a relatively unknown actor at the time of his casting, which for me made me emphasize more with the characters and the sequence of dramatic, life-threatening events that he and his comrades face throughout the film. Speaking of his comrades, Harry Styles has a future in acting after his great performance in this film. I thought he and his character were very good, as he portrayed a UK-biased character who didn't think very fondly of other nationalities, which provided for a interesting scene which I won't say any more about. The dogfight scenes were gripping, and the subplot with George was a very good one. It made you care as much about him as you did the soldiers, and that says a significant something about the storylines of the film - fantastic. The use of authentic ships and planes in this film actually enhanced the viewing, as you connected more with the action and the film was more vivid, making you feel more enveloped and involved with the happenings of the film. The only small critic I have is that when dialogue was used out of an action scene, and it wasn't all that much, I thought it was a bit bland/nonchalant considering what they had just come out of/the sheer danger that they are in all the time. I personally felt as if, again in very small quantities, the editing was a little poorly choice, and they could've edited it in a different way to create even more suspense/ action in the action scenes. All in all, a great film and one you shouldn't miss, especially since it is based off of a completely true, albeit harrowing, story.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

7

DaddypancakesSep 10, 2017

Pros: beautiful setting, intense and good action, good acting, emotional, rich dialouge, entertaining(most of the time)

Cons: some scenes go on to long, repetitive soundtrack, meh characters, disconnected plot, and boring at times OverallPros: beautiful setting, intense and good action, good acting, emotional, rich dialouge, entertaining(most of the time)

Cons: some scenes go on to long, repetitive soundtrack, meh characters, disconnected plot, and boring at times

Overall not very memorable and not the most entertaining time but overall pretty decent and for what it is it's good 7/10… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

LoveeLandSep 9, 2017

Dunkirk is the war movie equivalent of the Revenant. The film's effects, acting, and action were outstanding in every way. It has you at the edge of your seat throughout the whole thing. However there are some real knocks that can be made.Dunkirk is the war movie equivalent of the Revenant. The film's effects, acting, and action were outstanding in every way. It has you at the edge of your seat throughout the whole thing. However there are some real knocks that can be made. The movie can be confusing at times, as there are three different small stories going on over the course of the same week, but for different amounts of time and different areas. These stories all overlap at a certain point, but it can be confusing as to what is going on at some points. There was also very little narrative in the movie. It was 'get off the beach or die' and the lack of dialogue made this even more obvious. Like I said, an odd but reasonable comparison would be PG-13 WW2 edition of the Revenant. It was very bleak and grueling, adding to realism, but it had less of a narrative even than the Revenant. You never really see any actual Nazis, and they are repeatedly referred to as 'the enemy' which makes them seem more distant and less relevant. It may sound like I'm harping on the movie a lot, but its just that there are many points of criticism. Where the movie excels, it is top of the line, but it struggles to develop a real narrative to make it a classic. It would be like titanic without the storyline. While I said the acting was good, there was nothing that really made you care about the characters. It felt as though these two soldiers were chosen at random to be the focal points of the story. Overall it is probably worth the see just because it is entertaining and very well done, but you may walk out a little underwhelmed.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

2

jordynSep 6, 2017

I'll be totally honest. I don't understand any of the hype for this movie. Is it just because it's Christopher Nolan? Because that's the only reason I went and saw it, and I was unimpressed. The plot was simultaneously boring and confusingI'll be totally honest. I don't understand any of the hype for this movie. Is it just because it's Christopher Nolan? Because that's the only reason I went and saw it, and I was unimpressed. The plot was simultaneously boring and confusing and none of the characters had any depth. Most of them didn't even have names. I honestly don't know why I was supposed to care about anything that was happening onscreen. Like, I didn't enjoy watching people die - I'm not a monster. But it's hard to understand why this story was told. It was just a story of how sad war is, and even then, it didn't even do a great job of telling that. There's a million war movies more compelling and meaningful than this "artsy" **** Just cause it's sad doesn't make it a good story.… Expand

7 of 15 users found this helpful78

All this user's reviews

9

youngbloodhawkeSep 6, 2017

Dunkirk was excellent. Few dull moments and enjoyed the development of several character storylines. Fantastic imagery and fighting scenes (or bracing to be attacked scenes) which hit home to the randomness of war.

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

8

rubrandonmSep 5, 2017

Dunkirk displays Nolan's style at its most intriguing. The disparate plotlines are a bit confusing but make more sense with a second viewing. Nolan manages to unite the separated characters under his steadfast theme.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

9

PipeCAug 29, 2017

Christopher Nolan's ode is a cutting-edge gem of technical art. Nolan is one of the almost non-existent filmmakers who keep active excitement with every new release, in this way, three years after his last work, he raises a love letter to warChristopher Nolan's ode is a cutting-edge gem of technical art. Nolan is one of the almost non-existent filmmakers who keep active excitement with every new release, in this way, three years after his last work, he raises a love letter to war cinema, a mega-production that highlights, in capital letters, an experience that gets by without dialogues, even episodically. Narratively, it's his film less cerebral and ambitious among a gold catalog led by "Interstellar" and "Inception", however, from the beginning, the story feels warm in its coldness, he assiduously introduces us into the heartless event. Being a learned man in the field of selection of tones and objectives for his psychological stories, his greatest strength lies in his form of making movies, here, Nolan displays a new record, one easier to keep pace: Narration in pictures.

The first scene is the best letter of presentation, which will serve as a pattern, for a film imparting intensity. The movie conjures up superlative landscapes, the opening sequence is the entrance of a superb artistic hypnosis, a display of magnificent frames strengthened by a majestic 70 mm and IMAX cameras, the colors and shadows explicit in pictures are which lead the story by far. Functional aerial shots from unsuspected angles, explosions, and gunshots piercing our senses, respectful and quasi-negligible digital effects that ratify the commitment to turn a movie ticket into an absolute visceral experience. Clearly, Nolan film would not be exempt from allegories and metaphors through images; the grayish scum brought by the strong tide is a synonym of human filth, the framing of the soldier taking off his attire and running to death on his own, portraying defeat and pride, the corpses that are buried by snorting wind, the endless lines of men in pursuit of "salvation", the palette of blues and greens from the scene where soldiers contemplate an imminent attack, the three men looking at nowhere, the corpses returning to the shore, the covenant between two men burying one innocent under rough sand or the perfect framings of Kenneth Branagh and Tom Hardy are dreamy compositions that speak through colors, shadows, lighting and setting, a master class of cinematography and photography. The seventh art didn't deliver as such adrenaline and justified action in a non-commercial film for a long time, an artistic and technical triumph. Get ready, because "Dunkirk" is going to transcend.

Hans Zimmer, a faithful Musketeer, returns recharged and ready to rise with well-deserved awards at the expense of his scores that not only include atmospheric obligations, these try to emulate stressful melody of a countdown, atomic effect of explosive artifacts, meteoric heartbeat or oxygen deficiency of the martyrs, a list of cadences endowing scenes with energy and tension like no other war film. Mr. Zimmer's wonders gain greater strength to the excellent work in the sound editing room, which accompanied by Shepard tone, are exciting. Gunshots are deafening, they are combined with the soundtrack, the crackling of the fire, the teeth chattering of a soldier, the cries of help under the water or the overflight over our heads provoke one of the most compelling cinematic experiences.

I will never forget "Dunkirk", the movie that made me lose my record about seeing a film in IMAX cinemas, two words: mind-blowing and memorable.

Some familiar faces go back, flaunting their high acting capacities. Hardy, Rylance and Murphy manage the cast purely masculine, understandable due to the context of the events. Each one offers spirit and personality to their characters to ease the following of the story. The performances of newcomers Fionn Whitehead, Jack Lowden and new soloist Harry Styles are laudable and rewarding in the skin of children with war uniforms. In fact, Whitehead and Styles make a powerful debut that places them on the radar of quality directors, also in a panorama of acting prestige.

What would be the best words to describe "Dunkirk"? When the logo of Warner and Syncopy, bathed in a light blue, are unified with the war melodies, my feelings and sensations exploded of delight for the work of Christopher Nolan, creator of cinema with deep fundamentals and objectives. Brimming with complex and magnanimous technical components, intelligent and moving performances, a tremendous soundtrack and unmistakable and always welcome Nolan touch, "Dunkirk" becomes one of the best cinematographic experience so far this year, likewise, its function of entertaining for two hours with lights and pirouettes is relegated by the message of peace, unity and solidarity, three constituents not present in our anatomy. Did you think that one of the greatest war speeches in history — promulgated by the British politician Winston Churchill — recited by the protagonist was limited merely to the circumstance of the film?… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

10

ClariseSamuelsSep 4, 2017

Dunkirk is a WWII film about the drama of Operation Dynamo. But it is actually a film about wartime courage, and even more importantly, it is about wartime fear. Not just average fear, but the kind of fear that shocks every nerve in theDunkirk is a WWII film about the drama of Operation Dynamo. But it is actually a film about wartime courage, and even more importantly, it is about wartime fear. Not just average fear, but the kind of fear that shocks every nerve in the system and threatens to cancel out reality, replacing normalcy with an absurd void; the kind of fear that comes dive bombing out of the sky with a screaming terror that can deafen the ears and jar the soul.

The stars of this film are unknown actors, in keeping with the notion of the unknown soldier, the anonymous young men who were fed like fodder into a faceless, wartime death machine. They are young men with nondescript features, strangely bearing a resemblance to each other, as if they were all related to each other—brothers, sons, and cousins—all facing a grim reaper who cares nothing for their hopes, dreams, and aspirations, and who robs them of their individuality as well as their future. The movie casting does not draw attention to the fact that smaller, supporting roles are filled with big-time names. As you watch the film, a certain familiarity starts to clue you in. Is that Kenneth Branagh? Benedict Cumberbatch? Tom Hardy? Mark Rylance? They are hiding under officers' naval uniforms and aviation gear. They do not want to steal the spotlight from the cast that is playing the most important role in the film—the anonymous soldier on the beach who falls into a crumpled-up heap every time the German dive bombers make another sweep across the sky. This is the eternal essence of war—horror, desperation, hopelessness, and death.

Mark Rylance is the quiet, bland, and unassuming Mr. Dawson, one of the civilians who has in May of 1940 answered a frantic call from prime minister Winston Churchill. Hundreds of thousands of Allied soldiers are stranded on the French shore of Dunkirk, surrounded by the Germans, and they are close but yet so far from the White Cliffs of Dover and home. Churchill has ordered the requisitioning of small fishing boats, launches, pleasure craft and yachts to make the treacherous journey across the English Channel and take on as many soldiers as they can possibly fit in their modest vessels. (Many of the boats were requisitioned by the British Navy and were manned by experienced personnel; some were helmed by the private owners.) These vessels could navigate the shallow waters that the large military warships could not. The small boats, known as the Little Ships of Dunkirk, comprised about 850 private boats that sailed from Ramsgate, England to Dunkirk. Mr. Dawson, a private civilian, is among them, and the bravery of this and other insignificant sea captains like him is fiercely heroic and yet strangely unremarkable. The private citizens who volunteered are just average people doing what they have to do. Mr. Dawson has nerves of steel, and he is determined and uncannily courageous; nothing can force him to turn back. Although this is not intended to be a feel-good movie, the epic sight of hundreds of watercraft emerging from the mists of the sea to effectively rescue 338,000 men trapped on a WWII beach is nothing less than cinematic history. Director Christopher Nolan has made a WWII movie like no other.… Expand

8 of 12 users found this helpful84

All this user's reviews

7

Furkat228Sep 3, 2017

Для меня этот фильм не стал нечто великим. Было много фильмов про войну это точно не лучший среди них. Не понимаю откуда столько десяток фильм на 7 из 10. Фильм не шедевр просто хороший фильм. Лично для меня фильм не показал ничегоДля меня этот фильм не стал нечто великим. Было много фильмов про войну это точно не лучший среди них. Не понимаю откуда столько десяток фильм на 7 из 10. Фильм не шедевр просто хороший фильм. Лично для меня фильм не показал ничего удивительного. Ужасы войны можно было и показать и получше.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

10

Creeper3455Sep 1, 2017

In a summer (like others) filled with nothing but pointless sequels and remakes (with exceptions), Cristopher Nolan (the wonderous mind of Inception and TDK Trilogy) is back to the directing chair with Dunkirk,a war movie that not onlyIn a summer (like others) filled with nothing but pointless sequels and remakes (with exceptions), Cristopher Nolan (the wonderous mind of Inception and TDK Trilogy) is back to the directing chair with Dunkirk,a war movie that not only stands out as the best Nolan movie in a long time,but that also stands out as THE movie we needed this year. This may seem like another typical war movie with only action sequences and that's it. Dunkirk,on another hand,is not that war movie you'd expect nowadays. The story was for the most part non-stop war,with no moments where they stop to a scene that will 'calm down' the movie for a bit (ok,maybe it happens 1 or 2 times...),since most of the movie was surprisingly enjoyable,if not also intense and heart-beating at the same time. Even the music (composed once again,masterfully,by Hans Zimmer) makes the movie a non-stop living nightmare.A big orchestra gets reunion with the electronic instruments that will make you not sleep for the rest of the year (especially Supermarine,the best track out of the 'bunch'). I was also impressed by how this movie was filmed,since we don't have Wally Pfister as the Director of Photography. Same goes to the Vis...Practical Effects of the movie,sine everything in the movie was practical,from boats to planes and from water to explosions. It also paid off very well as a first time watching a movie in IMAX 70mm,since it felt as a realistic experience in that auditorium,with a BOATload of Sound Effects surrounding you everywhere (i almost had a heart attack while a gunshot came out of nowwhere). The acting was surprisingly superb. I didn't expect to like Harry Styles (?!?) as one of the main characters,while Tom Hardy is,as always,your typical Hardy in a mask. In the end,with beautiful imagery,a tense and heart-pounding story,superb acting,and a score that could be one of Zimmer's best,Dunkirk is THE DEFINITIVE Summer movie we all needed (while at the same time standing out as Nolan's best movie,if not also,of this year)… Expand

9 of 14 users found this helpful95

All this user's reviews

8

GreedyPete69000Aug 10, 2017

Not an enjoyable movie, but a masterful and a memorable experience. I caught myself holding my breath multiple times. What is Tom Hardy made of, that he can give a great performance while wearing multiple layers of clothing, stuck inside aNot an enjoyable movie, but a masterful and a memorable experience. I caught myself holding my breath multiple times. What is Tom Hardy made of, that he can give a great performance while wearing multiple layers of clothing, stuck inside a cramped cockpit, with only his eyes showing? Unreal.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

5

dispencer187Aug 29, 2017

Conceptually a 10/10. I guess I just didn't really care for the characters all that much. Not sure if that makes me a bad person but just couldn't really get into it.

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

8

EvilHerbivoreAug 29, 2017

A good piece of war cinema. Cinematography and sound work together to create a movie which gives the viewer some understanding of what it could have been like to participate in the events. The non-chronological action in my opinion adds toA good piece of war cinema. Cinematography and sound work together to create a movie which gives the viewer some understanding of what it could have been like to participate in the events. The non-chronological action in my opinion adds to the film, as otherwise it may have become just another war movie in which the viewer pretty much knows what is going to happen next. The cast does a splendid job, from Tom Hardy as a jet fighter pilot to Cillian Murphy as a shellshocked soldier to Kenneth Branagh as a typical British stiff upper lip commander. The only issue I can see is the amount of pathos, which may sometimes be too much, but which is understandable in a British war movie about British soldiers directed by a British director.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

10

meadowstreamAug 28, 2017

Absolutely brilliant: the weaving of the timelines, the character development with minimal dialogue, the unfolding of plot and theme without preachiness...this was one of those films that one could see several times and still get somethingAbsolutely brilliant: the weaving of the timelines, the character development with minimal dialogue, the unfolding of plot and theme without preachiness...this was one of those films that one could see several times and still get something from each viewing. The use of different filming parameters (depending on the scene) was interesting, too. My 18 yo son and I enjoyed it immensely.… Expand

3 of 8 users found this helpful35

All this user's reviews

9

CubscouterAug 27, 2017

Very sharp intro, straight into action; love the use of the Shepard tone in the soundtrack. The intensity of this film makes it exciting to watch. All in all, good war film.

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

9

Carlos_1092Aug 26, 2017

This is probably THE movie of the year, the action sequences were amazing, full of suspense, and you'll be on the edge of your seat for the entire movie, For example, just imagine if the Docking scene from "Interstellar" was 1 hour and 46This is probably THE movie of the year, the action sequences were amazing, full of suspense, and you'll be on the edge of your seat for the entire movie, For example, just imagine if the Docking scene from "Interstellar" was 1 hour and 46 minutes long, that's Dunkirk.
One of the things that makes this movie so great is how entertaining it is whithout relaying on the dialogue, it is a war movie that is going to make you realize the terror of a war without the use of blood or rotting corpses, and although it probably isn´t Nolan´s best film, it is high on that list
The only problem that i had with dunkirk is also its biggest strength, The suspense of it, sometimes the tense moments go for far too long, which only made me want to move on to the next scene, also, the movie takes very little time to breathe and that is usually a great thing, but a movie needs to "breathe" from time to time, but overall this film is nothing less than a masterpiece, another great Nolan film.… Expand

0 of 3 users found this helpful03

All this user's reviews

10

HTGamerAug 26, 2017

Dunkirk is a great war movie, possibly one of the best ever made, and it actually shows respect for the victims of the war, the nameless soldiers, with no Rambo-style shenanigans.

The movie is about the evacuation of more than 300,000Dunkirk is a great war movie, possibly one of the best ever made, and it actually shows respect for the victims of the war, the nameless soldiers, with no Rambo-style shenanigans.

The movie is about the evacuation of more than 300,000 English soldiers who got trapped at Dunkirk during the early stages of World War 2, and shows how the UK managed to save most of the stranded men through enlisting the help of many civilian boats rather than large warships (which got routinely bombed and sunk by the enemy, anyway). Despite the final outcome being well known, the movie builds suspense through great cinematography, editing and music, and never becomes boring.

The story is presented in a non linear way through three interweaving perspectives, in the air, land and sea. There are a few characters who get more screentime than others but there is no main protagonist, and little dialogue, because the movie isn't about an individual hero. It's about the thousands of men who are anxious to escape from Dunkirk alive while waiting for help from their country.

It's obvious that characters can't develop meaningfully in such a movie and it surprises me that critics complain about this, because, who cares if Tommy has a girlfriend back home? There is no place for personal stories in the fields of battle, all that matters during enemy bombings and air raids is to survive. One curious choice is that the movie constantly avoids to explicitly name the Nazis or even just the Germans, referring to them as "the enemy" instead. Nazi soldiers don't even show up on camera, rather they are heard shooting or just hinted at, maybe because the director wanted to emphasize the anxiety of soldiers to escape from the enemy, any enemy, not just the Nazis. I also liked the inclusion of Winston Churchill's famous "we shall fight... we shall never surrender" speach in the newspaper in the end, read by one of the evacuated soldiers.

All in all, Dunkirk is another great Christopher Nolan movie.… Expand

5 of 11 users found this helpful56

All this user's reviews

3

arcubalAug 24, 2017

The least inspiring and dramatic of films by Nolan. The characters never developed and were cardboard and the entire exposition of the plot took place over such a short amount of time you left the theater wondering "Why did I waste my timeThe least inspiring and dramatic of films by Nolan. The characters never developed and were cardboard and the entire exposition of the plot took place over such a short amount of time you left the theater wondering "Why did I waste my time with a snapshot of these men trying to get off a beach?" Don't waste your time and rewatch 'Inception' instead.… Expand

3 of 7 users found this helpful34

All this user's reviews

6

Termin8terAug 23, 2017

Let me just preface everything your'e are about to read by saying that I am a big fan of Christopher Nolan. His movie are always excellent. Batman Begins, Dark Knight, The Prestige, Inception, Interstellar are just some of the masterpiecesLet me just preface everything your'e are about to read by saying that I am a big fan of Christopher Nolan. His movie are always excellent. Batman Begins, Dark Knight, The Prestige, Inception, Interstellar are just some of the masterpieces he's crafted over the years. And I was pretty hyped for his next film. Not to mention the legendary Hans Zimmer doing the soundtrack. But I was very disappointed with Dunkirk. The opening was excellent though, but after that first 15-20 minutes I got mind-numbingly bored. The dialogue and drama was boring, the directing was pretty boring, and worst of all, the action scenes were boring. I can hardly believe this was directed by Nolan, it feels like he was just being lazy during writing and filming. And Hans Zimmer's soundtrack couldn't rescue this falling creation either. His tracks in Man of Steel, Inception, Interstellar, and The Dark Knight are all exemplary. But once again, I felt like Zimmer just completely dropped the ball, aside from one good track. I did not like Dunkirk. Feel free to disagree, but this was my honest opinion. I watched The Prestige about a month after this, and that film was light years ahead of this average film making.… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

1

pdw123Aug 22, 2017

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Well, you just know when you see only about 10% negative reviews, but then go to the actual reviews and see thoughtful people who have studied the history--but then it amounts to many more at 50% neg and mixed, that the studios are padding this with fake bots or something. Detroit was a great film that had the exact opposite issues than this--e.g., high percentage of neg ratings with only one or two actual thoughtful reviews in that direction. Certainly a teachable moment about what films are actually better ones and how to follow user reviews here on metacritic.

Where to even start with this? It is not and never will be the fine films Private Ryan or may favorite WWII film of all time, "The Thin Red Line". While I appreciate the newfangled stylized aspects with the noisy din of diving and strafing planes that makes you feel like you're actually there--the first scene where the aircraft bombs the soldiers on the beach, and then the beach is totally clean with no bodies must be one of the most ludicrous of all time. In subsequent scenes, yes, there are men's poignant screams where needed---esp. where a hull is being fired upon by who knows? also confusing, as we don't know if aircraft are strafing the hull or someone is outside--which would seem totally implausible if it were floating. When men are strafed on the bridge you would definitely expect to see a hella lot more carnage than what looks like men just blown off the thing antiseptically. Is this a new style of war filmmaking is the reason the critics were rating it so high--if the case, I'm not impressed nor with Nolan, whom I haven't thought much of in the past--another mainstream studio film affluent director.

I'm American, not British, so the dialog and story was truly a mess for me to decipher, so I just concentrated on the action, whatever. Actors should at least not mumble their lines and enunciate--if not, then we still need subtitles, Nolan.… Expand

4 of 11 users found this helpful47

All this user's reviews

10

sgy0003Aug 20, 2017

If you are going to watch this, watch it in the IMAX. Trust me, it is worth every penny. The sound design is already amazing in the regular version, but IMAX really takes the cake and immerses the viewers in the events of the Dunkirk beach.If you are going to watch this, watch it in the IMAX. Trust me, it is worth every penny. The sound design is already amazing in the regular version, but IMAX really takes the cake and immerses the viewers in the events of the Dunkirk beach.

The Desperation of the soldiers on the beach, the determination of civilian boats, and the bravery of the British Pilot all come together to form this amazing movie. You can practically feel living every moment in the movie.… Expand

4 of 9 users found this helpful45

All this user's reviews

10

EbertJrAug 20, 2017

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. The last great movie about WWII in the modern era was "Saving Private Ryan" and in my opinion this movie joins that elite company.

Nolan's attention to detail is present and up to its usual high standard, but what he also captured was the sense of isolation of those trapped Soldiers. They were trapped on a beach, surrounded by an enemy who was seemingly attacking at will, leaving not a single safe place to hide--not even the ships coming to rescue them. Such situations push men to their limits, showing their true character, and such character wasn't always good.

I serve in my country's armed forces and I have deployed into harm's way so I think that made me more sensitive that these men may have been Soldiers but they were still people doing whatever they could to survive such desperate times.

I will be very surprised if this movie is forgotten come award season.… Expand

3 of 7 users found this helpful34

All this user's reviews

9

BiplabAug 20, 2017

Dunkirk is a gargantuan war film. Whether it is the greatest war films of all time or not is a matter of both time and polemics. Unequivocally, the movie has the firepower to bracket itself among the other Great War films like Come and See,Dunkirk is a gargantuan war film. Whether it is the greatest war films of all time or not is a matter of both time and polemics. Unequivocally, the movie has the firepower to bracket itself among the other Great War films like Come and See, Apocalypse Now or Full Metal Jacket. However, Dunkirk is the greatest war film of all time - is a probable topic of discussion for the cinema lovers across the globe.

Dunkirk is Nolan’s best movie – till date. This movie is not only going to revive his attitude as an artist but will also help him to clear the air that he comes with a conservative agenda which he acquired after Inception and Interstellar. Dunkirk, based on Great Britain’s “Colossal Military Disaster” (quoted by Churchill, then Prime Minister of England) during WWII, brings out that Nolanesque flavor missing since Prestige.

The movie tells a string of acutely distressing stories of British soldiers hemmed in on the beach of Dunkirk. A story of survival, showing very little sympathy to the survivors; survival through retreating, hiding and other unjust and treacherous ways it could have been possible. The movie gives assurance that it will not take into a happy land. It is an intense war movie intended to make an indent on the far-fetched glory of Great Britain and its people. Though the story lacks the variety of Apocalypse Now or the spine-chilling barbarity depicted in Come and See, the single-layered uniformity makes it unique. It seems like, Nolan’s primary and sole agenda of making this movie is to tarnish the Britain’s military- glory and with that raising the questions concerning the role of Great Britain during WWII.

Dunkirk starts with one of the many attacks from the enemy's (the word enemy came in texts with the skillful omission of the word Germans or Germany) side killing 4-5 British soldiers leaving only one to retreat who lands himself in a hidey-hole of Dunkirk beach to survive. The director introduced the beach in a weird fashion. The scene goes like this: a frantic-looking retreating British soldier - the one returned from Enemy’s den- takes a piss in other-wordily way on the beach witnessing an orgy of dead bodies lying on the beach. That soldier - wearing a petty looking coat and always gasping – is certainly the signature tone the movie. That tone, present throughout the movie, was successful enough to dint image of her Majesty’s supreme pride – British Army and Royal Navy. The movie repeatedly raises the questions of the role of British army’s mindset, ability, and courage to face war-time challenges.

Dunkirk is an ear-bud perforating movie jam-packed with able bodied, grim-faced, dejected Caucasian men with the occasional presence of few Red Cross nurses. Those Caucasian men, mostly English, trapped at the beach of Dunkirk - a beautiful looking beach located in France- were waiting to get help from the other side of the English Channel.

In short, the movie questions the British people who have mastered the art of blowing-own-trumpet. Throughout the movie, Nolan depicted the agony and pain of the British soldiers through the imagery of sinking royal navy ships; debauched, shell-shocked, peer-despising, backstabbing British soldiers hiding under sheep decks; a confused lot of English admirals unable to take decisions; 3 Royal Jet Fighters (all lost at the end of the movie) trying to fight the mighty Germans; and the eventual evacuation of 3, 00,000 British soldiers by the ordinary English men and women.

Interestingly, Nolan omitted the major parts of the Churchill's "We Shall Never Surrender" speech. At the end of the movie, he also questioned the role of British media, especially towards their affinity in generating click-baiting headlines, in during the WWII.

Be it Harry Styles or Cillian Murphy or others mostly played the role of British soldiers in the movie are really successful in documenting the psychological states of the fallen British soldiers during Dunkirk evacuation. Tom Hardy, once again, passed with flying colors. The Nolan-Zimmer combination is successful, once again, in creating a screeching sound throughout the movie only making it a nerve-wracking experience for the audiences.

At the end, Dunkirk does give a new perspective to the world about an event that occurred in WWII.… Expand

0 of 4 users found this helpful04

All this user's reviews

7

VirgonoShakaAug 19, 2017

Well, first and foremost I want to get something out of the way, the music in this movie is AMAZING!!!! really Hanz, I knew you had it in you. The music makes everything in this movie better. Now with that out of the way, Dunkirk is in no wayWell, first and foremost I want to get something out of the way, the music in this movie is AMAZING!!!! really Hanz, I knew you had it in you. The music makes everything in this movie better. Now with that out of the way, Dunkirk is in no way a bad movie nor is it badly filmed or badly put together, but I don't think it is anything that ranges as a "masterpiece" or "must watch" either. The air scenes are impressive and the atmosphere is well played with Nolan's typical handle of time thrown in the mix. However really there is not a lot of investment in the characters. In a war movie one of the most important thing I factor is how much do I care of the fate of these people especially when it is based on real events and in this case I don't think Dunkirk pulls it very well. So aided with fantastic music, and some well put scenes here and there Dunkirk ends up as good movie that tells an interesting story, but I don't think this one is for the books either. Final verdict: 7.3… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

4

wollam11Aug 19, 2017

Vastly overrated film with dialogue that almost incomprehensible, most being mumbled, and little to no story beyond the basic plot: private yachts and fishing boats save the English infantry. Tye Sheridan is in this but I'm not sure he wasVastly overrated film with dialogue that almost incomprehensible, most being mumbled, and little to no story beyond the basic plot: private yachts and fishing boats save the English infantry. Tye Sheridan is in this but I'm not sure he was playing any character other than 'adventuring boy who tags along'- I knew nothing about him and frankly didn't care what happened to him. Just an incredibly boring movie.… Expand

2 of 5 users found this helpful23

All this user's reviews

8

DefinitelyMaybAug 18, 2017

Great survival (war) film with amazing cinematography. There is no denying how tense the film is and the amount of practical effects that went with it. However, I dont think this is Nolan's best work nor ranks as one of the best war films. IGreat survival (war) film with amazing cinematography. There is no denying how tense the film is and the amount of practical effects that went with it. However, I dont think this is Nolan's best work nor ranks as one of the best war films. I agree with most people that the story is rather bland and doesn't quite work because the scale is shrunk to a minature size. What most people seem to overlook is that the evacuation occurred over 5 days, with most soldiers saved actually by the actualy navy, but the creative choice in this film does not seem to capture this enough, instead spends more time on characters that at the end serve really little and I dont think you will necessarily get much following them at all - I rather Nolan just spent the entire film looking at different people in the process.… Expand

8 of 9 users found this helpful81

All this user's reviews

6

FelipePinillaAug 13, 2017

All the movie I was waiting for something to happen, I was a little desperate about it so I couldn't really enjoy the the good scenes.
A lady was sleeping just next to me. I think that if somebody fall asleep during the movie it can't be a good one

3 of 7 users found this helpful34

All this user's reviews

8

NathonasAug 18, 2017

Solid war movie. I think its biggest weakness is the difficulty of combining the three perspectives into one coherent storyline, and the lack of a central character.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

6

kenhowardAug 18, 2017

In iMax this movie was so big and so loud and so intense that it was hard to tell if it is a brilliant movie or only brilliant movie-making. Brilliant movie making for sure, but the fractured time, the three stories and the intenseIn iMax this movie was so big and so loud and so intense that it was hard to tell if it is a brilliant movie or only brilliant movie-making. Brilliant movie making for sure, but the fractured time, the three stories and the intense in-your-face of it makes it feel more like a rollercoaster ride than a complete narrative. There is a certain hopefulness of it, but no real end as far as I was concerned. Unbelievably awesome tour-de-force movie making, especially with those huge iMax cameras - I wish I had come out with a better sense of things rather than a sense that I'd been thrown into the middle of a horrifying engulfing war experience.… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

1

andreadavidedAug 18, 2017

That movie was boring and slow and every single character was instantly forgettable. Yawn. If you need a long piece of footage to help you fall asleep turn the volume down a bit and prepare for sweet dreams. SOPORIFIC.

4 of 10 users found this helpful46

All this user's reviews

9

akenaton1984Aug 18, 2017

Increíble, de tomas limpias que recuerdan a los filmes de la segunda guerra mundial. Nolan aplica de nuevo su tropos característicos: la sociedad (la realidad) como un artificio, su desintegración y la libre elección como sustento. AlgunosIncreíble, de tomas limpias que recuerdan a los filmes de la segunda guerra mundial. Nolan aplica de nuevo su tropos característicos: la sociedad (la realidad) como un artificio, su desintegración y la libre elección como sustento. Algunos mirarán en él un discurso nacionalista, pero es más un canto al espíritu humano que retorna como esos aviones incendiados.… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

9

kwameryanAug 18, 2017

Absolutely loved it. A compelling story told with minimal dialogue, jaw-dropping images and one hell of a soundtrack. A must-see film - the best I've seen this year.

1 of 4 users found this helpful13

All this user's reviews

9

oDjentoAug 13, 2017

This isn't a war movie, it is a survival movie. A film that has an interesting narrative structure that doesn't hold your hand to try explain the chronology. The film is tense, largely in due part to Hans Zimmers score but Nolans directingThis isn't a war movie, it is a survival movie. A film that has an interesting narrative structure that doesn't hold your hand to try explain the chronology. The film is tense, largely in due part to Hans Zimmers score but Nolans directing here is incredible, some truly breathtaking scenes and sequences. The script struggles at times and I found "The Sea" storyline the least effective (decent payoff for the end though) but everything else is incredibly made. So much visual storytelling and atmosphere, with hardly any dialogue to propel the movie forward. Kenneth Brannahs character is pointless admittedly, just being paid to walk up and down a promenade and spout out things about trying to get home but still despite this films few minor shortcomings overall the whole payoff is amazing. Great ending too, when you finally hear that stopwatch stop ticking you finally release the tension that you've built up from start to end over the movie. A must watch for sure, and even better in IMAX.… Expand

0 of 3 users found this helpful03

All this user's reviews

9

CineAutoctonoAug 17, 2017

The Movie of the Year, "Dunkirk" was a powerful movie, because the story, the perfomances, the edition, the photography and the environment of the WWII, was incredible, Christopher Nolan hits again.

1 of 4 users found this helpful13

All this user's reviews

10

almoAug 17, 2017

Nolan at his best. Great soundtrack. Pulse-pounding tension despite not being action-packed. A war film about what it's like to be there. Best seen in IMAX.

1 of 4 users found this helpful13

All this user's reviews

7

CantabridgianAug 16, 2017

While basically a beautifully made movie, sometimes the words were hard to decipher; it was often confusing to tell what was happening to whom. Not particularly enjoyable, despite some very good individual performances.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

3

sandbornAug 15, 2017

This is a masterpiece? Although the movie looks great, everything else just falls apart. I found the subplot with Rylance and Murphy to be bizarre, and does nothing for the movie. The soldiers are mostly faceless and devoid of any characterThis is a masterpiece? Although the movie looks great, everything else just falls apart. I found the subplot with Rylance and Murphy to be bizarre, and does nothing for the movie. The soldiers are mostly faceless and devoid of any character or humanity. I would like to compare this movie with 'Saving Private Ryan', but there is no comparison. 'SPR' is engaging from start to finish but this movie doesn't grab the audience at all!… Expand

10 of 20 users found this helpful1010

All this user's reviews

9

JoeCoolAug 15, 2017

A true masterpiece by Christopher Nolan, the best movie of the year so far and easily one of the best movies I've ever seen. Visualizing the horror of war without actually showing it. A truly awesome must see movie.

5 of 7 users found this helpful52

All this user's reviews

5

XitArSAug 13, 2017

I'm sorry! I really looked forward to this but this was the let down of the year! To begin with, you have no character development at all, all characters are just like ants, meaningless. The scope of the movie is supposed to be about an armyI'm sorry! I really looked forward to this but this was the let down of the year! To begin with, you have no character development at all, all characters are just like ants, meaningless. The scope of the movie is supposed to be about an army of 400 000 men, stranded in a city and how they were rescued. The highest number of men you ever see in one scene is perhaps one thousand, and that's a view of the entire beach. And what are they doing? Just standing in line waiting for boats to arrive. So instead of an epic saga, what you'll get is basically an old fisherman and his kid sailing on the English channel, two fighter pilots flying around in the air and a dozen random soldiers doing nothing. You see three-four airplanes in the air (in total, throughout the entire movie) and you get to see perhaps two destroyers. Other than that there's about one hundred fishing ships. This movie might be worth the watch if you have nothing else to do, but it definitely does not hold up to the hype. It's a mediocre movie at best!… Expand

2 of 5 users found this helpful23

All this user's reviews

10

ThisIsAkillAug 12, 2017

I never give a 10, I am not a 10 or 0 kind of reviewer. This is truly a masterpiece. Dunkirk is a thrilling, haunting picture of sound and cinematography. With no character development, and mostly no dialogue, this movie is mostly ran byI never give a 10, I am not a 10 or 0 kind of reviewer. This is truly a masterpiece. Dunkirk is a thrilling, haunting picture of sound and cinematography. With no character development, and mostly no dialogue, this movie is mostly ran by music which served it's purpose very well. Dunkirk is a truly a spectacle of action, drama and at times, horror. Such an intense, realistic take on war has never been filmed before, and hasn’t had me so immersed in the cinema for many years. Christopher Nolan has once again created a film that has you drawing for breath by the end.… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

0

GenuineOpinionAug 12, 2017

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I went into this movie knowing absolutely nothing about it. I was very disappointed. I wasn't invested in any of the characters, seriously couldn't give a crap about anyone, especially the silent protagonist or boy who dies slowly from a whack on the head. The movie had every cliche and war trope. There is literally nothing that made this movie stand out. The ending was okay. Hammy, but a jolly, cheerful 'yay-we're-gonna-be-okay~~' type of ending. Too cheerful to be realistic.… Expand

4 of 10 users found this helpful46

All this user's reviews

10

thecriticbananaAug 8, 2017

Dunkerque es la película que en un inicio nunca pensaste que iba a ser lo que es. El hecho es, que esta película dirigida por Christopher Nolan es una joya. Escaso en guion, Dunkerque tiene el toque que te deja en el borde de los asientos enDunkerque es la película que en un inicio nunca pensaste que iba a ser lo que es. El hecho es, que esta película dirigida por Christopher Nolan es una joya. Escaso en guion, Dunkerque tiene el toque que te deja en el borde de los asientos en la sala del cine. La forma en que te sitúa en diferentes lugares es impresionante, tierra, mar y aire fueron los lugares que se llevaron la atención de los espectadores. Nolan uso una receta que le dio una película bélica y al mismo tiempo una joya. No se merece un diez pero mínimo un ocho si. B.… Expand

0 of 3 users found this helpful03

All this user's reviews

9

WaelAug 10, 2017

If you thought Christopher Nolan couldn't outdo himself after 'Inception', 'The Dark Knight' trilogy, or even 'Interstellar', you should go see 'Dunkirk' to prove yourself wrong. The film kicks off with a bang, and whether it's in a littleIf you thought Christopher Nolan couldn't outdo himself after 'Inception', 'The Dark Knight' trilogy, or even 'Interstellar', you should go see 'Dunkirk' to prove yourself wrong. The film kicks off with a bang, and whether it's in a little street, or out on the shore, the scenery is absolutely gorgeous. Then, throughout all its sequences, it details the fight for survival, and the cruelty of the World War in true war-movie fashion. Some scenes are definitely gonna have you hyperventilating from stress, and the performance of the whole ensemble cast is absolutely beautiful. Merging the astonishing visuals, with the emotions-filled score is a huge plus point. Last, but not least, the screenplay writing turns out to be very creative, depicting three independent, but later overlapping plots. GENIUS!
In conclusion, 'Dunkirk' is easily the best movie released this summer, and watching it was a real treat, for both the eye and the heart.… Expand

1 of 4 users found this helpful13

All this user's reviews

7

GabMegaAug 10, 2017

No es la ultima venida de Jesus Cristo que todos pintan en Internet, y no creo que gane el Oscar a cosas argumentales ( pero si tecnicas debo de admitir), pero en algo tienen razón, es super inmersiva, sobretodo si estas en una sala 4D ( cosaNo es la ultima venida de Jesus Cristo que todos pintan en Internet, y no creo que gane el Oscar a cosas argumentales ( pero si tecnicas debo de admitir), pero en algo tienen razón, es super inmersiva, sobretodo si estas en una sala 4D ( cosa que no estuve, ya que en Venezuela la economía esta jodida). Nolan logra una obra tensa, no tanto como Guerra Z o Gravity, pero logra meter al espectador en el ambiente que se baso esta historia real.
Pero lo que más peca esta película es en la historia, okey, desde un principio se puede ver que es simple, y ahí no hay problema, la cuestión viene cuando la película te quiere confundir con algunas escenas que son flashbacks y otros eventos que están ocurriendo antes y durante el escape de la isla, queriendo ser complicada, pero no es necesario, ya que lo importante aquí es la inmersión, y sentir que el espectador se acojone ante las escenas de acción y supervivencia. Pero, hay algunas veces en que la película pareciera que inventara algunas escenas que no están basadas en los hechos reales, para que haya más momentos de tensión, pero quien sabe, hay que averiguar si es que todo fue real.

Si quieren ir al cine, tienen una buena opción para ver, pero eso si, tienen que prestar un tantito de atención y paciencia, ya que es un poco lenta en ciertos momentos, igualmente tienen como otra opción a Valerian y Spider-man para verla en cines.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

9

JFRuiterAug 10, 2017

This movie is great. Even if you miss some of the film, you can jump straight in and figure out what is happening. The film features plenty of action and showcases the fight for survival and the attempt of rescue. Although the characters doThis movie is great. Even if you miss some of the film, you can jump straight in and figure out what is happening. The film features plenty of action and showcases the fight for survival and the attempt of rescue. Although the characters do not develop much, it is a good thing for it highlights the fact that they are all soldiers; they are all going through the same tough situation. Very thrilling.… Expand

3 of 7 users found this helpful34

All this user's reviews

9

potatoman222Aug 10, 2017

Christopher Nolan volta em o que pode ser considerado o mais diferente de seus filmes. Aqui a guerra é exibida de forma nova - e louvável. Dentre os êxitos o maior dele vai para a estética que é um verdadeiro deleite ao espectador. A trilhaChristopher Nolan volta em o que pode ser considerado o mais diferente de seus filmes. Aqui a guerra é exibida de forma nova - e louvável. Dentre os êxitos o maior dele vai para a estética que é um verdadeiro deleite ao espectador. A trilha sonora de Hans Zimmer nos imerge na experiência fantástica e nos transporta para a praia de Dunkirk. O filme não trabalha muito bem seus personagens. A situação em que eles se encontram é o verdadeiro protagonista do filme de forma em que todos os personagens podem ser compactados em um só, mas isso não é algo que me incomodou.… Expand

1 of 4 users found this helpful13

All this user's reviews

9

Michael_Stars_5Aug 9, 2017

A gritty, suspenseful, not so violent war movie may be seen in the next decades as a true classic from talented filmmaker Christopher Nolan. I did find flaws in Dunkirk but forgot about them in minutes when I was thrown back into amazingA gritty, suspenseful, not so violent war movie may be seen in the next decades as a true classic from talented filmmaker Christopher Nolan. I did find flaws in Dunkirk but forgot about them in minutes when I was thrown back into amazing shots and action scenes. The sound is spectacular, being able to watch the film in 70mm was gorgeous and fun, and it's already a must see for people who aren't familiar with Nolan. Don't miss this one!… Expand

1 of 4 users found this helpful13

All this user's reviews

0

TheVietnamAug 9, 2017

Christopher Nolan never disappoints. Dunkirk's incredible soundtrack and sound effects create the most realistic feel I have felt in a movie for a very long time and the lack of dialogue and character development may seem like a bad thing butChristopher Nolan never disappoints. Dunkirk's incredible soundtrack and sound effects create the most realistic feel I have felt in a movie for a very long time and the lack of dialogue and character development may seem like a bad thing but it actually adds to the gritty feel of the movie. There is absolutely nothing I can fault this movie on.… Expand

5 of 15 users found this helpful510

All this user's reviews

6

ohnomrbillAug 9, 2017

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. i liked some of this film and did not like some of it. some of the scenes were fantastic to see then a few scenes made no sense. i hated the scene where they were in the hull of a boat waiting for the tide to come in while it was getting shot with holes to sink it. that made no sense to me. and the film was brittish and i am not so some of the language was hard to understand. at home i would have stopped it and rewound and played a few times to try and understand what they are saying. and i did not like the close ups of the guy with no lips, that was also hard to watch. i liked the many stories it was showing yet at the end, why did that plane take so long to land and were those people around him after he burnt the plane enemies? i was so glad when the film ended and i could leave the theater!… Expand

2 of 6 users found this helpful24

All this user's reviews

9

DutchboiAug 9, 2017

Very well written and constructed movie. One of the few movies this year that had me on the edge of my seat from start to finish. Beautifully composed soundtrack to go with it as well. Christopher Nolan astonishes yet again with thisVery well written and constructed movie. One of the few movies this year that had me on the edge of my seat from start to finish. Beautifully composed soundtrack to go with it as well. Christopher Nolan astonishes yet again with this thrilling yet gruesomely realistic war epic.… Expand

1 of 4 users found this helpful13

All this user's reviews

7

FromKangaAug 8, 2017

Dunkirk was a mix bag for me, on one hand it is a technical achievement and it is beautiful but on the other hand the movie fails at making me care about anything that was going on.

The movie looks and sounds incredible, if I had to judgeDunkirk was a mix bag for me, on one hand it is a technical achievement and it is beautiful but on the other hand the movie fails at making me care about anything that was going on.

The movie looks and sounds incredible, if I had to judge this movie from a technical perspective, it would be one of the best movies I have ever seen, some people complained about the soundtrack but I found it that it fits with the movie's tone really well (you never feel safe), the action scenes are really intense and the airplane scenes are the best moments I've ever seen in a war film and I really appreciate Christopher Nolan for trying as much pratical effects as possible.

However, the story wasn't really good in my opinion but it could've been great, it shows people who are trying to survive this war and it's really intense and well made but I do have problem with it, you never get to know any of the characters so I felt no emotional investiment while watching the movie.
And since the movie relies on the intensity of the action scenes, there is no story progression, it's just intense scene after intense scene which makes the movie feel longer than it actually is.

I'm frustrated by the fact that it could've easily been one of my favorite movies if it wasn't for the weirdly structured story and the underdeveloped characters, it is a movie worth watching in theatres just from the technical aspect but I was really dissapointed in some areas, I want to love this movie but I can't.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

8

jbrown8989Aug 8, 2017

Lived up the hype! Surprisingly there was not much dialogue but the cinematography was amazing. It is different from your traditional movie as it gets right into the action instead of building up to the storyline. Definitely one of the betterLived up the hype! Surprisingly there was not much dialogue but the cinematography was amazing. It is different from your traditional movie as it gets right into the action instead of building up to the storyline. Definitely one of the better movies this year.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

4

PaperThingAug 8, 2017

**** the zeitgeist propelling this movie.

Baffled by how Michael Bay or Terrance Malick are liable for being criticised for the exact things for which this movie is being praised for. Namely a beautifully shot, but completely asinine and**** the zeitgeist propelling this movie.

Baffled by how Michael Bay or Terrance Malick are liable for being criticised for the exact things for which this movie is being praised for. Namely a beautifully shot, but completely asinine and poorly constructed cure for insomnia.

There is no plot, there is little character and no development, the action scenes are poorly edited and paced, and the sound design for much of the film leaves the audio difficult to understand or become invested in. These are all criticism that could be levelled at the aforementioned filmmakers - that the framing and audio are unintelligible - but here it is scene as "daring" or "minimalistic".

Ultimately, it's worst crime is being too boring, for me at least, to suspend my disbelief. Save your money.… Expand

2 of 6 users found this helpful24

All this user's reviews

8

drlowdonJul 30, 2017

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Dunkirk tells the true story of the famous events in which hundreds of thousands of allied soldiers were evacuated from the beaches of Dunkirk and saved from capture or death at the hands of the invading German troops. Director Christopher Nolan has a stellar of history of creating intelligent big budget “summer blockbuster” movies (The Dark Knight and Inception being two prime examples) and he delivers again with Dunkirk. There is no shortage of action on land, at sea or in the air but Nolan’s now signature style of playing around with the chronology of scenes weaves the story into a web that continually ramps up the tension to a fitting climax.… Expand

0 of 4 users found this helpful04

All this user's reviews

6

judahjsnJul 25, 2017

Probably my second least favorite Nolan film. It felt like an attempt to bait critics into taking him more seriously. I'm glad that it's working – because he deserves to be taken more seriously – but this is less of a movie than it isProbably my second least favorite Nolan film. It felt like an attempt to bait critics into taking him more seriously. I'm glad that it's working – because he deserves to be taken more seriously – but this is less of a movie than it is cinematic bludgeon. Sound mix has been an increasing problem for the experience of seeing a Nolan film in theaters. Whereas with, say, Inception, I probably lost 15% of the dialogue, with Dunkirk I was only able to UNDERSTAND about 10% of it since Nolan decided to have the SFX and wall-to-wall score cranked to 10 the entire film, with whatever dialogue could poke through the noise smashed in there for good measure. Not that it mattered much because this was not a story about people as much as it was one long, Zimmer-esque minor chord trumpet blast of fear. It's like he said "People love Saving Private Ryan... what if I took the beach scene from that and stretched it for 2 hours, with none of the respite, or breaks for conversation and head clearing." Dunkirk was just a fatiguing experience. It's not even much of an action film since the people portrayed in the film are powerless to fight back. The aerial combat is fantastic and the real heart of the movie. Visual style is on 10 here as well. There are no sour notes from the actors, which was refreshing. Again, I would have really loved to have been able to understand what they were saying.… Expand

5 of 16 users found this helpful511

All this user's reviews

7

rewwexAug 7, 2017

What makes a movie tick? Soul, passion & heart. This movie didn't have any of those. Audiovisually stunning, but empty inside. Maybe this movie speaks to British audiences more than to the rest of us?

1 of 4 users found this helpful13

All this user's reviews

8

dharmaAug 7, 2017

A master at the peak of his career, Christoper Nolan utilizes his influence to create a relatively 'unusual' (i.e. reality based) blockbuster. Essentially an Imax showcase, it pulls out all sort of tricks that Nolan has learned throughoutA master at the peak of his career, Christoper Nolan utilizes his influence to create a relatively 'unusual' (i.e. reality based) blockbuster. Essentially an Imax showcase, it pulls out all sort of tricks that Nolan has learned throughout the years: large scale set pieces, both land and aerial, filmed in glorious IMAX. Too bad that at times, the film lost a bit of its intensity, simply because of its simple narrative (despite being told in Nolan's typical non linear style. This will be a big contender for all the technical Oscars in 2018.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

2

fmulhareAug 6, 2017

I guess I am an outlier here but I was very disappointed in this film.The narrative jumps around like a drunk kangaroo.Subplots are started and then abandoned about 20% of the way in to jump to another subplot only to abandon it 30% of theI guess I am an outlier here but I was very disappointed in this film.The narrative jumps around like a drunk kangaroo.Subplots are started and then abandoned about 20% of the way in to jump to another subplot only to abandon it 30% of the way in . Ever hear of ADD..well this director has it in spades!! Not only are we jumping from subplot to subplot but we are also jumping forwards and backwards in time within these various subplots.Basically this movie is a disjointed mess!!. Other than that it is perfectly fine!!… Expand

4 of 10 users found this helpful46

All this user's reviews

9

jordanwatchestvAug 6, 2017

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. From the opening scene until the end there is a sense of excitement and uncertainty of what will come next. This is orchestrated through fantastic writing and cinematography by Christopher Nolan, and the amazing score of powerful bass notes and a constant ticking of a watch that was gifted from Nolan to the genius composer Hans Zimmer. An amazing job was done to leave audiences on the edge of their seat, creating a sense of uncertainty of what was going to happen next. This was done through the score and direction, but ultimately the film's performers are what stole the show, especially Hardy who gives one of his greatest performances even when you are only able to see his eyes for the majority of it. One of Nolan's best and I highly recommend it to everyone who is in to the genre, and into amazing climactic stories!… Expand

6 of 9 users found this helpful63

All this user's reviews

10

decourcyAug 6, 2017

I almost never give a 10, I am not a 10 or 0 kind of reviewer. This is simply one of the best movies I have ever seen. There is very little dialogue, and I had thought physical acting was a thing of the past; not so, Nolan brought it backI almost never give a 10, I am not a 10 or 0 kind of reviewer. This is simply one of the best movies I have ever seen. There is very little dialogue, and I had thought physical acting was a thing of the past; not so, Nolan brought it back with people like Tom Hardy. Intensity beyond belief. Easily one of the most emotionally impacting movie ever made.… Expand

3 of 7 users found this helpful34

All this user's reviews

2

Nobilis1984Aug 6, 2017

Can one say me what in him film should be so brilliant? I find him terribly dull. Nolan has delivered here right dung. besides, I have in for Batman: The dark Knight thus famed. Rather looks to you old anti-war films in.

3 of 8 users found this helpful35

All this user's reviews

4

RighterAug 6, 2017

When compared to some great classic war movies, Dunkirk is both mediocre and unnecessary. Nolan, it seems, can't forget that Memento is what initially made him, and uses a time-shifting device that is both unnecessary to the drama andWhen compared to some great classic war movies, Dunkirk is both mediocre and unnecessary. Nolan, it seems, can't forget that Memento is what initially made him, and uses a time-shifting device that is both unnecessary to the drama and gimmicky to the point of tediousness. To make matters worse he deliberately dispenses with one word ("ago") that would have made viewers enjoy the time-shift instead of spending some time confused by it and trying to work out how it works. Add to that the ridiculous liberties he takes with history and it's clear he's pandering to British Jingoism and little else. Dunkirk ignores a few key historical facts; that the French kept the British soldiers alive, that the British, in return, didn't help the French evacuate their own soldiers, and that the only reason the evacuation of Dunkirk could take place was because Hitler (for his own reasons) specifically gave an order that stopped the Germans from attacking the allies in Dunkirk when he could quite easily have wiped out the soldiers stuck there. Even apart from all those issues, the movie is simply overhyped and lacks the scope that the buzz and the trailer would have you believe it has. To see the movie, you'd think the soldiers amounted to no more than a few thousand (and in most scenes, barely a few hundred). The soundtrack by Hans Zimmer (who is, by now, infamous for his music plagiarism) is also incredibly overrated and relies mostly on the 'Shepard Tone' audio illusion to create a false sense of tension and drama. Dunkirk is white, British, and pretentious and to top it all off, ends with Churchill's famous "We will never surrender" speech, which, by now, we're all tiresomely familiar with - once again glorifying a man who referred to Palestinians as 'dogs', and who allowed the bombing of Coventry, and who also had no issues bombing and destroying the civilian city of Dresden.… Expand

2 of 6 users found this helpful24

All this user's reviews

4

SpunkyMonkeyAug 6, 2017

Great in bits, poor in others, too long, not enough depth. There's defo moments which will have you buzzing, and it does capture a certain Britishness which I loved (the tea factor is awesome). But ultimately there's not really enough for youGreat in bits, poor in others, too long, not enough depth. There's defo moments which will have you buzzing, and it does capture a certain Britishness which I loved (the tea factor is awesome). But ultimately there's not really enough for you to invest in to be as moved as you should be. Plus it Hollywood-ifies it too much in parts, with OTT events constantly happening to one bloke and everyone thinking "well he's invulnerable"

And the music is annoying as hell music. Strings keep a two chord progression motif constantly running, as well as a single pitch note hanging constantly in a poor attempt to build tension. You feel more relief when the cavelry arrive that the music changes rather than that they've saved the day.

Also, Nolan just drags out some scenes way, WAY too much, and often mistakes building tension for building boredom.… Expand

1 of 4 users found this helpful13

All this user's reviews

0

deadDaddyAug 5, 2017

this movie is shiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiit

5 of 15 users found this helpful510

All this user's reviews

6

TheWaffleAug 5, 2017

A decent, middle-of-the-road war movie. The evacuation at Dunkirk was one of the most harrowing, nail-biting moment of World War 2, and this film somehow manages to drain all the narrative out of it. The action is great, and there's plenty ofA decent, middle-of-the-road war movie. The evacuation at Dunkirk was one of the most harrowing, nail-biting moment of World War 2, and this film somehow manages to drain all the narrative out of it. The action is great, and there's plenty of tension. But the film is pretty scattershot, jumping around in time and locations with no real narrative arc driving it. It felt like watching three separate movies about the same event, all directed by the History Channel.… Expand

2 of 5 users found this helpful23

All this user's reviews

9

moviecritic68Aug 5, 2017

A graphic depiction of how war affects the lives of many who are thrown into the mix. Filming scenes were excellent & had the audience captivated. Well worth seeing !

9 of 14 users found this helpful95

All this user's reviews

9

dashtagAug 5, 2017

I usually don't like the director Christopher Nolan, his films are very long and dark, plus go on in repetitive themes to show how flashy and smart he is. I was looking forward to Dunkirk, because it would be an interesting turn of his filmsI usually don't like the director Christopher Nolan, his films are very long and dark, plus go on in repetitive themes to show how flashy and smart he is. I was looking forward to Dunkirk, because it would be an interesting turn of his films and would give him acclaim. I feel that this was partially for Oscar bait, but who cares when you have a film like this. It's so intense and realistic, because it follows the feeling of the British soldiers themselves, not everyone in the war, but the events really happening. We don't need to know about what the Germans looked like, the characters reactions and actions to prevent the attacks and to save their own lives really shows what war is like. Many people don't appreciate the sophistication in this film, for Nolan has included a realistic amount of violence and a smart way to play with time. Very impressed how he jumped from the silly Interstellar to an accurate portrayal of Dunkirk. Beautifully shot, and don't listen to the haters about the film itself or about the history. Great movie.… Expand

7 of 10 users found this helpful73

All this user's reviews

0

ST73Aug 5, 2017

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Where do we start with this lver rated "disaster" of a war movie....
Ok the royal navy had 41 or more ships in the area at the time... pretty sure no hospital ships where sunk...spitfires are not russian yak training aircraft with 75seconds of ammunition ...they carrried enough for 13seconds only! ...the german "messershmitt bf109e" are not these where spanish built bouchon fighters ...completly wrong profile.... a container port can be clearly seen ...too much emphasis on small boats which only accounted for 5% of the troops rescued..on the subject of small boats a few wearing modern clothes.. retreatkng from an invisable enemy....musical score was out of place and unjustified ....oh and spitfires could not have landed on a wet sandy beach the undercarraige is too narrow and the plane would've dug in....so much is wrkng with this movie ...where the critics getting nice bonuses?… Expand

6 of 19 users found this helpful613

All this user's reviews

2

Captain_MisfireJul 22, 2017

After many reviews I was looking forward to seeing the film but came out feeling rather dissapointed. It was dull, uninspiring and had no tension that really grabs and pulls you towards the film with further interest. I felt so detached fromAfter many reviews I was looking forward to seeing the film but came out feeling rather dissapointed. It was dull, uninspiring and had no tension that really grabs and pulls you towards the film with further interest. I felt so detached from the film, I don't know where the good reviews are coming from, are we talking about the same movie here?
The big actors in this film dissapoint because there is hardly any acting. Tom Hardy sits in a cockpit for the entire film (everyone could do that) and can't hit a barndoor with a machine gun, I can only see 2 eyes and a forehead.. At the end his plane runs out of fuel, hovers in the air but he seems to fly on forever. Cillian Murphy mumbles and walks around on a tugboat from time to time. There is no character development or interesting dialogue that makes you feel involved/connected and caring about the troops and their misery. Hardly any signs of fatigue, broken nerves/ shattered spirits and wounded men (except for a few men on stretchers). These scenes do not make me think that I wouldn't like to be in someone's shoes being stuck on a beach, not knowing what's coming next. The possibility of death/ becoming a prisoner or saved by a rescue operation, seeing so many struggles on a beach you can't imagine how you will get picked up..

The beach in the film is very(!) clean (with some dead soldiers that's really impressive) and there seems to be no sign of chaos, fatigue, fear or despair. There is absolutely no equipment scattered over the beach that looks close to a scrapyard, no trash, discarded gear and no abandoned vehicles etc. About 3 to 400.000 soldiers were saved but I saw 500-750 in the film (they all looked the same btw, hair and face), also I saw 10 to 15 boats TOPS. More than 900 boats took part in this operation over the course of 9 days and that's a fact. The smaller boats were used to carry men off the beach and put them on bigger steamers/boats, didn't see that. This film could have improved significantly with an extra 30 minutes at the beginning of the film. Brief fighting/retreating around Dunkirk showing the peril, discussions in Churchill's HQ about the situation in France and trying to save the troops against staggering odds. Such dialogue could have made it gripping, showing wht was at stake in that part of the war. Show me how everyone in England came together with everything they had that could float, trying to save the troops. Tom Hardy would be better placed trying to hold off the Germans and surrender at the end when he knows many troops are saved. In real life many thousands and injured who could not be saved were sacrificed and stayed behind In to keep the Germans away. A dejected Murphy waits on a beach to be rescued, that role could have suited him. The dogfights were rather dull.
I was confused because of the jarring cuts in time and the shift (too fast) between the 3 characters. I can't believe some positive reviews here "intense", "great acting", "best war film" Someone even commented they couldn't find flaws, in the first 5 minutes by looking at the housing in the background and the tiling, didn't look like 1940. Look at the background when they filmed the beach from the sea, modern housing and lights, streetlamps, shipping containers and crains.
Can't understand why Christopher Nolan couldn't just make a straightforward, linnear warfilm that tells a gripping (true)story without all this fancy colouring and artistic filming. I went to see this film for it's story and not for the way it was filmed, coloured or making many switches from one time to another. It doesn't focus on anything in particular except for rescue.

I wish these (expert) reviewers watched some documentary's like the world at war that really grips you and then watch the film again. Heck, even look on google for Dunkirk equipment and such. Steven Spielberg should have made this as Nolan would film Saving private Ryan with no casualties and no dialogue. Wouldn't want to see the film again.… Expand

46 of 101 users found this helpful4655

All this user's reviews

10

Abhijit1991Aug 4, 2017

A heart pounding movie made possible by Hanz Zimmer's tense background score and Nolan's tight script. The movie perfectly conveys the claustrophobic atmosphere of the story.

7 of 10 users found this helpful73

All this user's reviews

10

Fabian-GonzaloAug 4, 2017

masterpiece of movie, it has everything, very good history with great realism, visual effects, sound environment, physics, story telling, acting.... Nolan did it again my friend, what an amazing director...

3 of 7 users found this helpful34

All this user's reviews

6

EpigenAug 4, 2017

I don't know what to say. Awe-inspiring cinematography and sound effects. That's basically it. No real plot. I get it, it's about survival and coming together. But that's not enough to engage a viewer. I don't think it's a bad movie, but I'mI don't know what to say. Awe-inspiring cinematography and sound effects. That's basically it. No real plot. I get it, it's about survival and coming together. But that's not enough to engage a viewer. I don't think it's a bad movie, but I'm not sure how this movie is so celebrated. It has amazing, amazing cinematography. But a movie is not only made of cinematography. Highly overrated.… Expand

2 of 5 users found this helpful23

All this user's reviews

8

KeithDowAug 4, 2017

Christopher Nolan is arguably the most technically proficient director in the game. From one film to the next, he ceaselessly pushes the boundaries of his craft, insisting upon large format cameras, actual film, and ever more complicatedChristopher Nolan is arguably the most technically proficient director in the game. From one film to the next, he ceaselessly pushes the boundaries of his craft, insisting upon large format cameras, actual film, and ever more complicated shots.

As a result--technically speaking--'Dunkirk' meets or exceeds every expectation. The expansive beach landscapes, claustrophobic interior settings, and countless practical effects all lend a sense of heightened realism to this historical drama.

Yet, it's the story itself that lacks the intensity Nolan was aiming for. The three vantage point structure detracts from the overall immersion into the film. Cillian Murphy's character is both confounding and frustratingly hollow. And there is a fair amount of repetitiveness to the plot. It should be noted that Hans Zimmer's score is nothing short of remarkable and serves as a much need thread of consistency throughout the film. However, when history has its say, 'Dunkirk' will likely reside on a lesser tier of Nolan's filmography.… Expand

2 of 5 users found this helpful23

All this user's reviews

3

TheDirtyGermanAug 4, 2017

Underwhelming. For me that's the only word can describe this movie. I saw this movie with my 73 year old father in law and we both had the same reaction to this movie. We really wanted to like it. We both love great war movies. This movieUnderwhelming. For me that's the only word can describe this movie. I saw this movie with my 73 year old father in law and we both had the same reaction to this movie. We really wanted to like it. We both love great war movies. This movie was beautiful to watch, especially in IMAX. The first 10 minutes or so was pretty good. After that, no real substance. No character development. Virtually no dialogue. It was so difficult to really care about any of the characters. Tom Hardy's character was pretty good, but still no depth. The timeline is a bit odd, but I didn't feel that it added anything to the movie. Nothing like Memento, my favorite Nolan movie. The movie seemed so much longer than than the 107 minutes that it was. Pacing was awful. I have no idea how it gets so many 100 scores.… Expand

31 of 52 users found this helpful3121

All this user's reviews

2

GarrAug 3, 2017

Dunkirk, more like Dung-Crap! This movie looked and sounded great in I-Max. That's the end of the good. Now to the bad. This movie had no characters. I felt zero emotional connection to anyone in this movie. I didn't care if anyone lived orDunkirk, more like Dung-Crap! This movie looked and sounded great in I-Max. That's the end of the good. Now to the bad. This movie had no characters. I felt zero emotional connection to anyone in this movie. I didn't care if anyone lived or died. Mark Rylance's character was the only one who was halfway interesting. He was the only character who had a decent amount of dialogue in the film, who had a clear goal, and who made decisions. The other character that had more than 5 lines in the picture was Kenneth Branagh's. He was utterly pointless. It seemed like he was watching the movie, and his purpose was just to say a cheesy lines about "Home" every once in a while. Tom Hardy's character was boring, repetitive, and predictable. This movie is so messed up, it is really hard to decide who the main character is, but if I had to decide, it'd be the guy we see 1st. He is very forgettable. He looks and acts almost identical to almost everyone in the whole movie. He meets a friend while he is taking a dump. No joke. He stops and helps his new friend bury a body. And he doesn't poop the whole movie. Him and his new friend just try to escape the whole movie. That leads me to my second point: there is no plot. It's just a bunch of explosions. There's more plot in a Transformers movie. 'Poop guy' and 'bury dead body guy' just go from ship to ship trying to live. By the way, the movie is almost over before 'bury dead body guy' says anything. So these guys try to live, Kenneth Branagh stands on a dock and says things that don't matter, Mark Rylance picks up survivors in his boat, and Tom Hardy shoots other planes, while in his plane, over and over and over again, while not being seen or heard. And that's your movie. I kept waiting for the opening action sequence to be over. I kept waiting for it to slow down a little and have some exposition, but it never did. It was like I missed the beginning and just tuned into the climax of a long, humorless, silent picture. That's not to say that a movie can't be action packed and be great. U-571 is an example of a nearly non-stop, action packed, WWII movie, thrill ride. U-571 managed to have memorable and distinct characters with different purposes. U-571 had a plot with a clear goal and twists and turns. If Dunkirk could've just cut out some of the unnecessary bits, like Kenneth Branagh, and had the 1st half hour be set up and character development, then it could've been really good. But as it was, I didn't care about any of it. I kept watching English soldiers die and thinking, "I don't care. This movie didn't make me care." As simple as the plot for Dunkirk was, the movie was really confusing. You'd think if you're going for an exciting, action thriller, that a simple linear plot would suffice. This movie jumps all over the timeline without giving any hint that it just made a jump in time. Christopher Nolan does a great job of jumping all over the timeline in his movie Memento. In Memento, he manages to keep things coherent and engaging. Not so here. This is just disappointing. The time jumping is completely unnecessary here. What little dialogue there is in this film is really hard to hear because of thick accents, loud explosions, masks over faces, and the music being really loud in the mix. With a really simple plot that is really hard to follow and characters with zero development or even distinguishing traits, I found myself in a really big struggle to care about what I was watching, even with incredible imagery and sound design. Yet, the whole time, the movie was telling me what I was watching was really exciting with it's music score. And that leads me to my last point: I hated the music. It pains me to say that because I usually love Hans Zimmer, especially under the direction of Christopher Nolan. There is virtually no melody in this score. It's relentless and annoying. I guess I can't blame Zimmer, considering he was just scoring to picture. Imagine watching The Dark Knight, but during the entire movie all you heard was The Joker's theme, non-stop. That's what it's like. The whole soundtrack may as well just be an air raid siren. And it's not just the music. The sound effects, as incredible as they were, were also loud, annoying, and relentless. At times, I found myself covering my ears. I thought, "Why am I paying money to cover my ears? What I'm covering my ears to is what I paid for." You know what movie is better than this: all the movies I have seen this year. Valerian and The Mummy were even better. They were at least fun. The best movie I've seen this Summer is War for the Planet of the Apes, but you really need to see all the Apes pictures to get the full enjoyment out of that one. The next best is Spider-Man: Homecoming, but maybe you're not up to date with the Marvel movies. In that case, see Wonder Woman. You don't need to see the other DC movies to enjoy that one. But what ever you do, don't see Dunkirk. I beg of you not to give that garbage your support.… Expand

14 of 30 users found this helpful1416

All this user's reviews

10

ReeceF11Aug 3, 2017

Dunkirk is one of the best war films I've ever seen. The soundtrack and overall sound in this is breathtaking. One of the best cinema experiences I've had. Would Definitely recommend 10/10.

3 of 9 users found this helpful36

All this user's reviews

Dunkirk

User Reviews